Talk:Mahim Fort/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- Starting GAR.Pyrotec (talk) 10:30, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
GA review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
An interesting article which is worthy of expansion, but which suffers from a lack of published information.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- The problem is lack of sources.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- The problem is lack of sources.
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- As this is a fort article there should be some consideration of the layout of the fort and how it was used to defend its location. This information is unpublished, even in primary sources.
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- it would be nice if this article could be expanded sufficiently to make GA. Unfortunately this is unlikely in the near future as there is no published information that could be used to expand this article. What appears in this article considerable exceeds the single paragraph in Scholberg (1995) Fortress Portugal in India: A Photographic History of the Portuguese Forts of India. New Brighton: Northstar Publications Minnesota.Pyrotec (talk) 22:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail: